196 replies to this topic

[BradN]

Just to clarify on the hardware change, I think the only thing that may have been changed for 1.01 hardware wise is using different interrupt triggers for everything... If anything was changed on the circuit board, it would just be a couple different wires to the CPU so it uses the NMI for the LCD refresh, and drives the rest of the system (keyboard, auto power off timer) off of that.

In a way, the 1.01 setup is better because the LCD interrupt runs at full speed, and on non-1.01, it seems to run 1/3 speed. It also makes it easier to deal with when you know everything is driven from one interrupt. I think 1.01 may be slightly buggy though. I've encountered an occasional lockup in the casio basic editor.

The other thing that makes me pretty sure the hardware (or at very least, an internal CPU setting configured in the factory) changed is that one cannot warm boot a 1.01 BIOS on a 1.00 calculator, or vice versa. (I tried this by loading the other system segment into one of the flash blocks, reconfiguring the C000 - D000 block to use that flash block, and jumping to the reset vector at FFFF:0000.) It always locks up. If I remember, it works when you put the original BIOS into a flash block though.

I hope someone can figure out a way to set the LCD refresh interrupt to fire every refresh on non-1.01... it would improve greyscale a lot.

Someone should try a 1.02 BIOS on a 1.00 calculator...

[Brazzucko]

I see so many answers but, as everyone says ?it?s my theory??.

So I make a very extensive search for the true??..

And the true is:

The AFX 2.0 is older in comparison with the FX 1.0, I have found in the official CASIO site the table with the date of ?birth? of the Calculators:

Model and year

9750 - 1997
9850 - 1996
9850+ - 1997
9850GB+ -1998
9950 - 1996
9950GB+ - 1998
9970 - 1998
AFX 2.0 - 1999
FX 1.0 - 2000

As you can see for example the CFX9850 is more older in comparison whit the FX 9750, the only difference between this 2 calculators it?s the monitor, the 98* use a 3 colour screen, and the 97* use a monochromatic screen, and for surprise the CFX9950
And the CFX 9850 are the oldest CASIO calculators.

( I have the CASIO FX 9750G, CFX 9850GB Plus and FX 1.0 )

So why the CASIO do that?

The answer is simple the market do that, the CASIO start whit the AFX 2.0, but in many countries this model it?s not allowed in exams, ( USA, Brazil, Portugal, Germany ?..), this model was made for the students of the university?s, so the CASIO has to adapted this model then they ?created? the FX 1.0 ( this explains why this calculator has ONLY the ROM 1.02, and the same AFX software ).

About the FX 1.0 thing like this, if they are the first model so why they has the same AFX software?

[sigma]

Hello guys,

I have a FX 1.0 version 1.02. How do I add CAS, ALG and TUTOR ?

[Brazzucko]

To do this you need a software to change the System of your calculator, for example the FlashCom 1.5

I will send to you this file and program and a help file to explain it ( to you have the same main menu of the AFX )

[superna]

yea i'm right !

[MathManiac]

If you have a FX1.0 Plus, you just have to run the joint2.exe (it is on drive F) with the arguments CAS, ALGEBRA or TUTORIAL (yeah just link it to the menu with Flashcom/FlashEditor/Flash100 ...or other thing that someone may create)

[Brazzucko]

To Mohamed and Matmaniac?.

I have seen something about a fake system program, for me it?s very important to have this program, because I have heard something that the teacher in my school have orders to delete all the memories of all he calculators??

Can you please send it to me ( a fake system program for the FX 1.0, and the source if it?s possible ).

To Matmaniac?.

So you have a FX 1.0 Plus?. Can you please send to me the Plus files of this calculator, in y FX 1.0 I have those files ( please send the files that I don?t have )

Please send to me all the files of drive A:\.

SALTIRE1, SALTIRE2, RUNMAT, ALGEBRA, CAS, TUTOR, PARTBL04, PARTBL01, PARTBL02, CONICS, PROG, LINKT, DYNA, STAT, GRAPH, SYSTEM, MEMORY, EQUA and RECUR

To all?.

I have 3 CASIO calculators ( my FX 1.0, my sister CFX 9850GB Plus, and my brother FX 9750G )

In the backside of my FX 1.0, I have ?found? the version of my hidden menu, my hidden menu is the ZX947, and in the backside of the calculator, I have this number Z947 ? 01?.

The CFX 9850GB Plus hidden menu version is ZX939, and in the backside, I have Z939 ? 92

The FX 9750G ( for who don?t know the difference between the 9750 and the 9850 is the Plus software, and the screen, the 9750 has a monochromatic screen, but whit the same 128x64 pixels of resolution ), the hidden menu version is ZX934, but in the backside don?t have nothing?.

Some one can explain-me if this is a estrange coincidence, or if is a way to identify the hidden menu version?..

Now the 01, and 92 of the FX 1.0 and CFX are the year 01 ? 2001, 92 ? 1992?

P.S. What is TCPA?

[BiTwhise]

The menu (/model) number is written on the back, yes.

on my AFX2.0, it says Z945-91

I really don't think the -91 has anything to do with which year it was released (91 seems way to old for the afx)

Could perhaps be a revision no/area code/country code or something like that.

[MathManiac]

Errr it wasn't my calc, but i can try to arrange that. (if those files exist in the fx1.0 plus- There are several diferences inside it )


And i didnt reveive the files from Mohamed ( or i may have deleted it because i thought it was spam .. )

[2072]

By the way, If you want to know if these files are the same on each calc use the EXPLORER of TOUCHE it can compute CRC32 on files (the same than winzip).

--> put the cursor on the file then press F3 then C

[Brazzucko]

To mathmaniac?..

I can get the fake SYSTEM of the G100/+, if you know C++ can you make the changes for they have the same look of the FX 1.0, in English and Portuguese?

And yes I want to know what is the software differences between the FX and FX Plus, if you can tell-me that I really appreciate that?..

To Mohamed?.

If you read this please send to me and to mathmaniac the Fake SYSTEM and the source?..

To 2072?.

Do you say to do that in what explorer, if I press F3 in the EXPLORER, the speed menu of the transfer option will appear?.

The C key is the [ Ln ] key right??

What is CRC32

To BradN?..

So they are hardware differences between the FX 1.0 and the FX 2.0 ( of the ROM 1.00 and 1.01 )?

If yes what is the differences?..

To BiTwhise?..

Ok tanks for you explanation about the backside ?menssage??.

To all?

Can you tell-me how many options we have in the ZX* menu, and what are they function?

So to know what means the second part of the backside ?code? let?s do this, please put here the version of your hidden menu and model, and the place of acquisition ex:

FX 1.0, Z947 ? 01 ? Portugal

CFX 9850GB Plus, ZX939 ? 92 ? Portugal

I will verify if in the CASIO site has anything about this.

Tanks for your collaboration??

[2072]

It's in the explorer of TOUCHE... (T_EXPLOR.EXE)

CRC32 is a number that is specific to each file so if on 2 files this number is the same it means that the content of the 2 files are identical.

CRC32 is used by archiver like RAR or ZIP to check the integrity of files.

[BiTwhise]

Basically, it's a check-sum

In (VERY) rare cases two different files might end in the same checksum though..

[BradN]

More clarification on possible hardware changes:

This primarily involves the ROM version, not the calculator version... there may be FX 1.0's with 1.00 or 1.01 ROM, maybe even 1.02, and I know there are FX 2.0's with 1.00-1.02 ROM versions.

The hardware change seems fairly minor (but significant to possible greyscale methods), and only seems to affect how different things trigger interrupts. 1.01 runs almost everything off of one interrupt (the NMI, triggered by the LCD refresh) - this drives the auto power off feature, as well as telling the calculator to check for keypresses.

On 1.00 and other versions, these tasks seem to be handled by separate interrupts, and the interrupt that causes the keyboard to be read (seems to be based on the LCD refresh) only seems to trigger once every 3 refreshes, making greyscale by page flipping flicker badly. One thing that would be nice to know, is exactly where this division by 3 is taking place... if it is done inside the CPU, perhaps there is a register somewhere that can be changed to make it fire every refresh, making greyscale not suck as badly on it.

So, just to restate, I don't think this is a matter of FX 1.0 vs FX 2.0, just the particular ROM version used. Now, as to why casio would change this stuff, I have no idea. It seems like excessive changes like these would make writing some add-in software a nightmare.

[MathManiac]

They haven't launched an official "add-ins maker" for some reason:
Possible official answers from casio:
-You could discover that fx1=afx2, with three non linked apps in the menu (so fx1.0 is an afx1)
-We want to play with the roms (Japanese toys!!)
-Casio Basic is enough! Who want to make faster programs? and why?
-Only genious make Add-ins (such as our CAS2 "upgrade" ). The only genious in the world are here!!
-Don't you read the licence agreement when you use add-ins installer? All the cfx files are made by casio! (even if it is not!!)
-We are waiting that Microsoft launches Window Casio- XP, and it will "eat" all the available FLASH, so you dont need an add-ins creator (if you create some kind of smaller <{GNULINUX}> or mac os we and microsoft will sue you!)


By the way the fx1.0plus i had in my hands had a 1.03 rom (i remmember that), and was a gy*** model (probably 347, but i am not 100% sure)
and my afx2.0plus has a 1.03 rom and is a GY350)

OBS: Microsoft and Casio are copyrighted trademarks. They belong to their owners.

[Brazzucko]

FINALMENTE AQU? EST? A PROVA PELA QUAL ANDAVA A PROCURA???.

I have a great new for all of you guys??

THE FX 1.0 HAVE THE SAME AFX PLUS SOFTWARE???.

I have see that no one was interested in ?my topic? about the tune of the FX 1.0 to FX 1.0 Plus, but when I see the message of matemaniac, I decided to do a new thing, force the calc to the system stays unstable.

I do that to provoke bugs to understand how the software works.

The best way to do that it?s using the MAXMEN from Roeoender.

I just use too high values, then I launch the files from SysExplore.

Using this method I launch the SYSTEM program.

I really don?t know what I have exactly done ( because I was watching TV ), but when I lock back to my calc I have the FLASH MEMORY MANAGER menu!!!!!!!!!!!

I have the following options:

Which area do you want to erase?

F1:All Flash Area
F2:All Add-in Area

The problem is that the calc has stopped.

And for help me I can?t ( yet ), reproduce this ?bug?.

If some one has any idea to make them work, or opinion please put it here??..

I don?t know why but the G100 need a cracker to launch the TUTOR program, this is the case for the FX 1.0 have the Pus software?

Another question, why I don?t have the option to disable the TUTOR program, like the AFX, I thing that these programs needs something to ?say? which model they are installed, or I?m wrong??.

Olha matemaniaco muito obrigado pela sua considera?->o heim??

J? agora posso enviar-te por E-mail quest?es relacionadas ao Turbo C++ da Borland?

[MathManiac]

Brazzucko
Hein? S? agora vi que o meu mail foi devolvido... (eu mandei-te um mail, mas parece que O MEU ISP -lusoweb- anda meio lixado)
[N->o recebi o mail do Mohamed, n->o enviou o teu...]

Manda, (se eu n-> receber mudo de isp )

Manda para Matemaniaco AT clix.pt e para cpmat AT hotmail.com (um dos dois vai receber...pelo menos espero!)
N->o vou responder logo (muito trabalho) mas vou...
Ainda n->o vi a fx1.0plus (tenho de pegar na m?quina do meu irm->o, e ?ltimamente a minha casa tem sido mais dormit?rio que casa...)
Se tens acesso a ICQ ou MSN Menseger ser? mais facil apanhares-me...em tempo real
................................................................................
......................................
Weird mail problems

...And by the way, wich of my posts did you read?

[Brazzucko]

Hi guys?..

So many people here have very different opinions about the RM Algebra FX 2.0?.

Once again after a VERY LONG research for the ?true? I have found this?..

The RM-Algebra FX 2.0 has EXACTLY the same specifications of the Algebra FX 2.0 ( the manual it?s the same ).

The RM-Algebra FX 2.0 Plus packages include:

- OHP Projection Unit ( OH-15 )
( Main AC adaptor equipped whit unit AD-A60024 )

- Data communication cable ( SB-62 )

- PC Link cable ( SB-87 )

- Carrying case

- AC adaptor
( External AC adaptor for the calculator )

- Hard case

- Four AAA-size batteries

- Algebra FX 2.0 Plus user?s guide

- RM-Algebra FX 2.0 Plus user?s guide
( This manual have instruction to use the OH-15 projection unit, and to change the software of the calculator, it also include a CD ROM whit software for the calculator )

There is no information about the hardware of this calculator.

For the users of the RM-Algebra FX 2.0, it is easy to upgrade they calculator to the RM-Algebra FX 2.0 Plus, just install the following data using the PC link cable SB-87:

http://www.casio.co....up/license.html

You can find the instructions to install this software here:

http://www.casio.co..../rmfx20_up.html

The problem it is that you only can run the installer program under Windows 95/98

Note that if you want, you can install in the RM-Algebra FX 2.0 the FX 1.0 Software.

For what I have see the installer will change all the ?ROM? memory programs ( including the ?language files?, Autoexec.bat, Command.com and *.sys files.

The *.bi_ file ( the file that the installer needs to upgrade the RM-Algebra FX 2.0 ), have all the ROM programs and files of the Algebra FX 2.0 Plus

I have tried to install this software on my FX 1.0, but this message appears:

You need a new version of the installer to install the software

This message only can means two things:

- I can upgrade my FX 1.0 to the Algebra FX 2.0 Plus, but I need a new installer, because the hardware is different.

- I cannot install this software, there is no error message for who are tried to install this software in a different calculator.

If you want you can tried to install this software on your calculator.

Now about the FX 1.0

Some one can tell-me what arguments I have to use whit SYSTEM.EXE to access to the Flash memory manager menu, I have tried but I can?t reproduce the bug??.

About the G100+

To access the TUTOR program on G100+ and FX 1.0 Plus , we must use the TUTOR, as argument , it?s probably the same that I have to do to access normally the Flash memory manager menu right?

The same is for the STAT.EXE, in the Plus models the STAT.EXE have more options, whit the correct argument, in theory I can have the same options right?

However, what arguments I have to use for this two examples?

One more thing the AFX 2.0 use arguments to execute some or any ROM program?

I will keep trying to reproduce the bug, to tell you guys how to do it.

Tanks??.

P.S. ? I already have tuned 15 FX \Plus 1.0 to AFX 2.0 \ Plus, they all by the FX 1.0 \ Plus after a very persuasive friend tell they to do it, and 4 from the internet?..

In Portugal the FX 1.0 has disappeared from the shops, now you only find the FX 1.0 Plus.

The FX 1.0 still more cheap, I really don?t know why they disappear??

P.S 2 ? For matemaniac?..

Sorry guys it?s in portuguese, I do that to express my ideas whiteout limitations, because my English is very bad, and because, me and matemaniac don?t know why our E-mails are ?lost???..

Olha matemaniaco eu estava me referindo ao t?pico FX 1.0 Plus software on FX 1.0.

Eu tinha desistido dele devido a falta de interesse da galera, mas o seu coment?rio levantou o meu astral, e acabei descobrindo o Flash memory manager menu, por isso agradeci o seu coment?rio, pois sem ele n->o sei quando ? que teria feito tal descoberta.

? e algu?m tinha de manter o t?pico vivo ?.

Quanto ?s d?vidas em rela?->o ao Borland 3, eu descobri qual era o problema que me impedia de compilar os programas, o problema agora est? em aprender C, eu estou fazendo o mesmo que fiz em rela?->o ao CASIO BASIC, alterando os jogos e vendo os resultados, assim eu o aprendi.

Acabei fazendo jogos e programas, e agora sou eu que ensino aos outros.

Eu estou fazendo o mesmo no jogo Pacman do Duobab.

Eu estou criando novos n?veis ( que ser->o maiores e mais dif?ceis ), nesta primeira fase.

Numa segunda pretendo usar a ?tecnologia? grayscale.

Se tudo correr bem eu entrarei em contacto com o Duobab pedindo autoriza?->o para distribuir essa nova vers->o que chamei Pacman 2.

Assim que compilar a primeira vers->o beta eu lha enviarei para dares a sua opini->o.

Pra al?m disso que livros e m?todos aconselhas para aprender C++?

Podes-me enviar o arquivo System da sua calculadora ( se for uma AFX 2.0 Plus ).

Obrigado pela sua disponibilidade em me ajudar??..

[Brazzucko]

So BrandN tell-me one thing, there is any hardware difference between the FX 1.0 and FX 2.0, or the difference depending only in the ROM?s version?

I ask this because I want to know how the software knows in which calculator they are installed, Roeoender has send to me his AFX 2.0 ROM 1.01 and I haven?t see any differences from my FX 1.0 ROM 1.02??..

What are the RM Algebra FX 2.0 hardware specifications?

I only get info about the software for this calculator?

One more thing, why there is different energy consumption from the FX 1.0 and the AFX 2.0, ( see your manual for more details ), this is the prove that the hardware it?s different?

To all?..

So anyone have success to install the Plus software?

[BradN]

If your question is how you can determine what version of the hardware your program is running on, you can just hook interrupts 02h and 53h and see which one fires from the LCD refresh.

I can't see any reason that there should be any exclusive hardware difference between the FX 1.0 and 2.0.

What exactly is the difference in power consumption?

[Brazzucko]

This is the battery consumption difference:

AFX 2.0

LR03 (AM4)

- 230 hours ( continued screen visualization )
- 150 hours ( continued calculations, 5 min of calculations and 55 min of screen visualization

R03 (UM4)

- 140 hours ( continued screen visualization )
- 90 hours ( continued calculations, 5 min of calculations and 55 min of screen visualization

FX 1.0

LR03 (AM4)

- 200 hours ( continued screen visualization )
- 140 hours ( continued calculations, 5 min of calculations and 55 min of screen visualization

R03 (UM4)

- 120 hours ( continued screen visualization )
- 80 hours ( continued calculations, 5 min of calculations and 55 min of screen visualization

Maybe I?m wrong, but I thing that this difference explains how the software knows in which calc. they are installed, I have ?installed? the files from A:\drive ( thanks Roeoender ) from one AFX ROM 1.01, and I haven?t see any difference, I still whiteout the option to disable the TUTOR program??..

What?s your opinion?

[MathManiac]

...ou alguem enganou-se a escrever o manual ou alguem vai ter de explorar a fx1.0 como deve ser.

To Brazzuco: o programa do sr. M ? interessante e facilmente adapt?vel...

To everybody:
Someone should explain the differences. If the hardware is the same, how can we explain this?

Ok, that's something that should be explored. Who has a fx1.0 and has time to explore that and post those informations here?

[Brazzucko]

To matemaniac

Qual ? o programa a qual te referes??? sr.M???????

To all:

The portuguese manual has these info, your manual has this info too?

[MathManiac]

N->o recebeste o mail do Mohamed ?
(n->o comprei a minha afx2.0plus em Portugal...saiu-me mais barato comprar na Alemanha, mas o manual ingl?s tambem traz essas informa??es)
Na minha opini->o estas diferen?as devem-se a ligeiras altera??es no software da calculadora (em rela?->o ? 2.0)


To the non-portuguese speakers: i didnt say anything really usefull
The AFX2.0 manual is fully available to download in english (pdf format) in casio's website

You can find the differences there.

[BradN]

I think the battery life differences are insignificant... if someone has both kinds of calcs and some rechargable batteries, they should time how long they last in each when running a casio basic program loop (ie, using 100% cpu). I think casio just kinda changed the numbers to make the FX2 look better. Now, standby battery life (when the CPU isn't really doing anything) can be influenced by the effeciency of the BIOS interrupt handlers... the more CPU they use, the more the battery is drained.

[Brazzucko]

I have the same opinion BrandN but today I use one AFX 2.0 ROM 1.01 and I play 2 games one BASIC game ( made by ?me? ), and the Pacman from DUOBAB, and I verify ( me and the onwer of the calculator ) that?s these 2 games are more slow in the AFX 2.0 ( it?s a very very small difference, but they exist )?

Now this means that?s the FX it?s more faster, ( and this justify the battery consumption ), or there is some ?bug? in the AFX ROM 1.01

What you thing?

[Brazzucko]

To matemaniac

Oh yes I receive then?.

But now I?m working whit a friend to made a new fake system?. All write on C

[Exca]

1.01 is different from 1.00 and 1.02

[Brazzucko]

This difference justify the "speed" difference?

[BiTwhise]

hlt instructions execute at 3 times the speed on ROM1.01 (that is, they really execute at 1/3 normal speed on ROM1.02, 1.03).. meaning, the cpu stays in "standby" for shorter periods of time, consuming more battery (depending on the power saving features of the programs). also, as BradN said, the power consumption when the system is "idle" is affected by the BIOS interrupt handling, which has probably been rewritten

[Brazzucko]

What's this means for my FX 1.0 ROM 1.02?

[Brazzucko]

And for the AFX ROM 1.02?

I have tested one program today in one AFX 2.0 and the result are the same in the AFX 2.0 ROM 1.01!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Brazzucko]

Today I talk whit a CASIO employer ( he is a real CASIO employer ), and he tell-me that it?s possible that the FX 1.0 have more clock speed in comparison whit the AFX 2.0, but he isn?t sure because he don?t work whit this model, but he promised to me that they will give that info??.

I meet him at the driving school?..

[Ihmemies]

Ok, i have fx1.0+, but don't know how to use flashcom or flash editor, or anything else than casio's own program and calipso's packager :| What should I do if I wanted CAS, Algebra etc icons to my calc's main menu?

[Brazzucko]

The FX 1.0 Plus has many differences inside in comparation whit the FX 1.0, you must execute whit arguments one file of your calc to have the CAS Algebra and TUTOR

You must to launch from the main menu the joint2.exe file whit the arguments CAS ALGEBRA and TUTOR.......

I will send to you by E-mail the FlashCom 1.5, the System file and instructions to do it on your calc. on this sunday.... whait ok......

[Brazzucko]

Hi guys

So the FX 1.0 has the same AFX 2.0 ROM 1.02 software??

To upgrade the ROM programs we simply can install then, but they are too large, and easily occupy all the available flash memory?..

I have read a much time ago here that one guy have the flash memory chip damaged, when he removes the chip the calc works fine, but whit the ship on the place the calc always crash, when he start the calc??

If I?m not wrong the flash disk has exactly 1Mb, and the 131Kb for each drive ( 6 on this case ) are only one software limitations ( by CASIO ), the chip are not a ?package? of 6 flash chip?s whit 131Kb.

So it?s possible to install for example a 2 Mb flash chip and using new PC link programs, install software on the new 7 available drivers, and execute then?

For who is interested this is a nice test to check the calc speed, simply do this on CAS

297!

and?

( 297! x 2 ) + ( 297! / 2 )

The elapsed time ( when I press EXE and the result appear ), on my FX 1.0 ROM 1.02 was:

12 sec.

and?

23 sec.

Tell me your results if you have one AFX 2.0, AFX 2.0 Plus, FX 1.0 Plus, G100 and G100+

Tanks?..

[BiTwhise]

AFX2.0, ROM1.01, Same times, as expected.. don't think they've made any special changes to the CAS program, so it should execute in roughly the same time anyway (can't measure minor differnces with a stop watch.. would need a proper benchmark program)

[Brazzucko]

I have made a BASIC bechmark program, that test all the calc functions, I do that to compare my 3 calcs ( FX 9750G, CFX 9850GB Plus, and FX 1.0 ), i don't know where i store then, when I found it i will put then here for download........, just for now check the results....

1- - FX 9750G ( this calc has the same CFX hardware whiteout the color screen )
2- - CFX 9850GB Plus
3- - FX 1.0

[Brazzucko]

I don't know why but nany guys just prefer the AFX and not the FX.....

Come on guys the FX 1.0 HAS THE SAME AFX 2.0 SOFTWARE, and YES YOU CAN USE THE CAS, ALGEBRA AND TUTOR WHITEOUT USING SPACE OF THE FLASH MEMORY, those programs are in drive D: IN THE ROM MEMORY OF THE CALC, the ONLY DIFFERENCE IT'S THAT THE FX 1.0 DON'T HAVE THE CAS, ALGEBRA AND TUTOR programs LINKED IN THE MAIN MENU, BUT WITH ANY APROPRIATE PROGRAM IT'S EASY TO DO THAT.......

The tuned calc works perfectly, and of course you can use one AFX 2.0 in a exam where the AFX are not allowed, it's my case......

So DON'T THING for solong, if you need a AFX 2.0, just buy the FX 1.0, the Fx 1.0 is a CHEAPER AFX 2.0........

[Mohamed]

Calm down! <_<

*edit* besides, the FX 1.0 is a cheaper FX 2.0 for people having the cable, if you search a little here, you'll find 3 or 4 topics about people falling in great messes with the cable or not able to find it and buy it.